The Legal Responsibility of States to Reduce Their Contributions to Climate Change

The report assesses the legal responsibilities of states to protect World Heritage-listed coral reefs, using the Great Barrier Reef as a case study. It argues that Australia, as a high per-capita emitter with significant resources, is failing its obligations by not sufficiently reducing greenhouse gas emissions, permitting new fossil fuel infrastructure in the Galilee Basin, and failing to mitigate non-climate stressors such as the expansion of the Abbot Point coal port. The document recommends that the World Heritage Committee inscribe the Great Barrier Reef on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

• Climate change is the primary threat to coral reefs globally, with projections suggesting that 70% of corals worldwide will suffer long-term degradation by 2030 even under ambitious emission reduction scenarios.
• The Great Barrier Reef experienced its worst recorded coral die-off in 2016, with 22% of corals dying overall and approximately two-thirds of shallow-water corals dying in the northern third of the Reef.
• Under the World Heritage Convention, states have a primary responsibility to protect properties within their territory, and their specific obligations are determined by the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities based on their contribution to the problem and their capacity to act.
• Australia is failing to meet its fair share of emissions reductions; its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of 26% to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030 is considered inadequate and unlikely to be met.
• The development of new fossil fuel infrastructure in the Galilee Basin, specifically the Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Project, creates a 'carbon legacy' that threatens the Reef's survival.
• Australia is failing to reduce non-climate stressors, exemplified by the approval of the Abbot Point port expansion, which involves dredging that destroys seagrass habitat and increases industrial shipping risks.
• The Reef 2050 Plan is criticized as an insufficient management framework because it lacks enforceable, scientifically justified targets and is silent on the impacts of new fossil fuel projects.
• The Great Barrier Reef meets multiple criteria for inscription on the List of World Heritage in Danger, including ascertained dangers like species decline and potential dangers like inadequate management systems.

APA

Earthjustice (2017). The Legal Responsibility of States to Reduce Their Contributions to Climate Change. https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/world-heritage-climate-change_march-2017.pdf

Chicago

Earthjustice. The Legal Responsibility of States to Reduce Their Contributions to Climate Change. 2017. https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/world-heritage-climate-change_march-2017.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Earthjustice |title=The Legal Responsibility of States to Reduce Their Contributions to Climate Change |date=March 2017 |url=https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/world-heritage-climate-change_march-2017.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{earthjustice2017legal, author = {{Earthjustice}}, title = {{The Legal Responsibility of States to Reduce Their Contributions to Climate Change}}, institution = {Earthjustice}, year = {2017}, month = mar, url = {https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/world-heritage-climate-change_march-2017.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }